I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
I do believe we'll get to see our beloved preznit "meeting-n-greeting" folks at the local coffee shop. Of course, there'll be a police cordon around the coffee shop and every patron will be there by invitation only. It will be wonderfully heart-warming ... and will contain no natural ingredients.
Where he will demand reporters eat ribs.
Atrios, you read my mind. I've been wondering this same thing, exactly. Bush only addresses hand-picked crowds of his supporters. He is apparently so thin-skinned that demonstrators are kept out of sight and out of earshot.
I went to a Jerry Brown rally when I was a grad student in California. It was in a public park in the middle of town-- completely open to one and all. It was great. We sat on the grass and listened, and Gov. Brown was very good.
you're very correct, atrios. They'll use terra as an excuse to keep the Unelected-Monkey-Boy-King-in-a-Flightsuit in very controlled situations, just like they do with Kim Jong-Il and other totalitarian leaders.
I think the real reason, though, is that there's a real animosity out there towards Chimpy McSmirk, and the Roveians are desperate not to let anything pop their perception bubble.
Clinton didn't feel the need to have 100% control over who attended his appearances.
Why is it that the Smirking Chimp is afraid to allow the average American to be seen with him?
Yeah, I remember being able to shake hands with Clinton, no big whoop at the time. I just walked into the stadium with thousands in attendance no overt security or anything. The only thing keeping protesters away was the sheer overwhelming ratio of supporter to protestor. A dozen or so hanged around outside, but nobody was keeping them out.
I can't even imagine president yellow-stain doing anything like this. Even before 9/11.
...but everything has changed since 9/11...the prez does have to mingle (and he is not available on weekends or after 8PM anyway)
(another reason of course being Bush's inability to think on his feet and hold his own in unscripted situations... but IMHO it's not the main reason, not this year. There is a growing hostility towards Chimpy. Can you imagine if Bush did an unscripted appearance, and there was a spontaneous demonstration against Bush? And how that would be all over the news, suddenly making people feel comfortable with being openly angry about the Bush ruling junta? Rove is DESPERATE to avoid this kind of situation, in an election year!)
No matter how much effort they put forth to control the crowds, at some point there will be some incident where he's heckled, mooned, or something along those lines. The challenge, of course, is getting in, but if Rush's phone-screeners can be beaten from time to time, so also will Dubya's perimeter. Perhaps we can count on youth, and one of his donor's wise-ass kids will pull some camera-friendly stunt? (Oh, shazbat -- will the press be allowed at his events, or just Fox and MSGOP?)
This is off topic, but is it a Picklerism to point out a huge, as opposed to a warranted or understandable omission?
"Rumsfeld asserted that the war showed other "rogue regimes" what could happen if they should refuse to come clean about disarming. He did not mention that inspectors have failed to find banned weapons in Iraq, a principal reason the Bush administration gave for invading last March."
Is there a benign Pickler?
NYT
No, not what happened to Reagan. Is that a start?
I've been wondering about this, too.
As Atrios points out, Bush has never appeared in public since becoming president. He has rallies with pre-selected Republican loyalists, while protestors are cordoned off, away from the action.
The only things he's had resembling "regular guy" interaction with the public are visits to the Crawford coffee shop with the press corps in tow. Even this leads to embarassing situations like the famous "I need ribs" incident.
Considering the number of people willing to protest him everywhere he goes, I imagine we won't see much real campaigning from Bush.
Will the Democratic candidate press this advantage? Too bad John Kerry's such a stick in the mud.
Also, as far as the media is concerned, Bush's simulated public events are just as good as the real thing. They will treat his closed rallies as public events in their reporting.
Hopefully, wherever he appears there will be large groups of demonstrators who will REFUSE to be moved into "free-speech" zones away from the nice pictures that Rove and Shrub want all to see.
Bush is a bit thin-skinned, and I think they are desperate to avoid anything other than the image of adoring citizens.
The routine practice of demonstrators being moved to other locations based solely on their message needs to be resisted wherever Chimpy goes.....it is outrageous that this fraud will campaign as the freedom-fighter of the world, while he tramples on it for propaganda purposes everywhere he travels.
Bush campaigns at invitation-only fundraisers.
I hope he mingles in with crowds and no one has to go through any metal detectors or anything like that which tends to keep the people away.
In 2004 I saw Gore in Oregon in an open area. There were roadblocks and a lot of traffic control, but to go to the rally, literally all you had to do was show up. I believe I walked between two security guys on the way in, but most of the perimeter was open, with security strung loosely around it. Two Bush hecklers near me got shut up and had their signs torn down, but they were NOT removed from the area and I chatted with one of them for e few minutes. (Actually, I quietly baited the asshole).
Seems like a different country, doesn't it?
Two words, Atrios:
Potemkin audiences
Bush was here in Phoenix last November. I heard grapevine-style that he stopped by a local Tex-Mex joint and mingled with the patrons. The story goes that the Secret Service stayed in the background and Bush had lunch like a regular guy.
Obviously I don't know if this story is actually true. But I think Bush himself isn't afraid of being among the public. As long as there are no cameras around, he probably likes hanging with the locals and being a big shot.
*With* the media around, it's a different story. His handlers don't want videotape of any "Who cares what you think?" moments. That’s why he doesn’t do truly public media events; the chances of embarrassment are too high.
I've been thinking this too. He seems really stressed out lately. He lives in his own bubble world and is President of some other country than the real one. I don't see how he can really campaign either. Such a contrast to the rough and tumble the Dems have been through. They won't be able to protect him 100% if he really campaigns. It will all seem weird - people will sense it.
for those of you who did not get my email address above - it's Lynne.Cheney@whitehouse.gov
He was up here in Connecticut recently. It was real nice. Surrounded by every cop in town while helicopters playfully circled overhead.
"Why is it that the Smirking Chimp is afraid to allow the average American to be seen with him? --renato"
Actually, the question should be:
"Why is it that the average American is afraid to allow the president to be seen with him?"
Apparently, 50% of us feel this way.
Hell, I wouldn't want anyone to judge me by who I'm seen with.
I was at a Kerry rally in Delaware a few weeks ago, and got to stand next to both him and Sen. Biden at times and shake each's hands. I was never patted down or anything. I know that Kerry has protection via the Treasury Dept, but I didn't feel it at all.
pie - well, Cheney has a pacemaker, and it is well known that some other electronic devices can wreak havoc on a pacemaker. Not advocating, just saying...
yankeedoodle - not only does he just campaign at those fundraisers, he's making us pay for those trips. He calls them presidential business trips. Like the Atlanta trip. Someone needs to start looking into this in depth.
yes, "free speech zones" should be actively resisted. if you have to go with a sign, make it on those pop-out car window shades, you know, you can keep it in your shirt, get into the event, and then pop out your sign. you might get one minute of actual Amurkan freedom before the Secret Service hustles you away. as if they have the right.
yes, I would very much emotionally enjoy having Bush removed, but recall that the left is not violent. Can you name one assassination of a right wing figure by a left wing liberal? I am having trouble coming up with anything. we just want to get along, dammit, and take care of the little guys. And just think, if he were removed, then someone much smarter would take over. We can't have that, because we need to defeat him.
Actually, I'd be more worried about the Dem nominee than Shrubya. Some of those fundies are real wackos and would not hestitate to do a little killing because God told them to.
forgot to say- I honestly think that the Res is drugged. He doesn't read the papers, he doesn't watch the news, and he sure as hell doesn't access alternative media. He only knows what he is told, and is only presented to the public in highly controlled situations. I doubt that this will change, although TERROR surely can't be used as an excuse to avoid every debate, can it? they probably have a whole list of distractions readied.
yes, I would very much emotionally enjoy having Bush removed, but recall that the left is not violent.
As the fascists are so fond of claiming, 9/11 changed everything.
I suspect it'll be a replay of his visit to England. Lots of big events with plenty of pomp and circumstance interspersed with the occasional tightly controlled pub -- or, as TonyB suggests, coffee shop -- visit. Oh, and lots of interactions with smiling, cheering military personnel.
mary,
Since Bush is so thin-skinned, the key is to get in his face as much as possible in venues where, by the nature of things, he can't avoid direct confrontation. Say, for instance, the presidential debate. If Kerry has enough balls to get in his face about the really DIRTY stuff in his past, and hang on like a pitbull no matter how much "outrage" he expresses, he might very well provoke a Tom Eagleton moment on stage.
You liberals will be punished for your arrogance. 9-11 was nothing.
Can you name one assassination of a right wing figure by a left wing liberal?
The one that springs to mind is McKinley. A number have people found parallels between Bush and McKinley. Unfortunately there's also one important differenc: McKinley had a decent VP.
Someone will take a shot at the Democratic candidate, and that will be the excuse for Shrub to stay in his shell.
"Unelected-Monkey-Boy-King-in-a-Flightsuit'
"Chimpy McSmirk"
"Smirking Chimp"
Dude, you know the lingo.
Public appearances - out.
Sound bite speeches - in.
Slick well produced advertising - in.
Surrogates and endorsements - in.
24/7 pro-Bush coverage on Talk radio and Fox - in.
Campaining via Christian Groups - in.
Lot's of RNC disinformation - in.
Expecting the mainstream media to repeat their mistakes of 2000 - in.
I still think it's insane that anyone believes that there will be an actual presidential debate. I will entertain bets on this. I absolutely believe that there is no way in hell Bush will appear for a real live debate with whoever the nominee is. He has a thousand excuses he can trot out, and he will. And if all else fails, a little ricin sent in an envelope at the right time could provide a handy excuse - "it's too dangerous."
If I'm reading correctly, then Seraphiel's 5:25 p.m. post should be removed from this board. (Even tongue-in-cheek, certain things should not be said....)
Dubya will fly in his cheering crowd with him, wherever he goes. The event will be hermetically sealed, and the camera angles will have been tested at least 30 days in advance. Why do you think W's been spending 3-4 days a week at fundraisers? They need that $200 mil to pay the fake audiences!
The $ will also buy lots of banners saying things like "Reducing the Deficit" and "Strengthening the Economy" and "Putting Blacks Back in their Place" (Well, maybe that last one's only for the event at Bob Jones U).
He made a Coast Guard ship move the other day to just give him a better backdrop.
The time has come for inflitration. Like that movie where the guy got into the KKK so he could bust them. You would be taking your life in your hands, but you would be like a spy. It would be COOOL.
Maybe someone can appear republican ENOUGH to get into the regular speech zone and then when the cameras are on flash the sign. When you are hustled away then you could make your TV movie of the week about your experience. "I was a Young Republican--SPY!"
Oh and you could have your wife played by Patricia Heaton.
It's occasionally good fun to play "stump-the-Republican" by asking them something like, "so, when was the last time Bush appeared in front of anything other than a hand-picked audience?"
Campaign issue:
"..Bush afraid of associating with regular americans. Fears kissing babies cause it might pressure him into kiss a non-white, dirty one..."
"..Bush canceled his trip to the local ford production plant because doing so resulted in the forced shut-down of the production lines costing Ford Motor Company over $500,ooo dollars an hour. Employees were subjected to intimate security precautions, compelling some to reject attendence, or participating. Those that did were reprimanded by supervisors with threats that if they didn't attend then their jobs would be shipped off to the Ford facilities in Mexico..."
Example highlights I would love to see.
MYOB'
.
When was the last time any of them appeared in front of anything other than a hand-picked audience? It's been so long since Cheney saw sunlight, he's a whiter shade of pale.
(used to love that song)
The Note at ABC News says that Bush will be appearing at the Daytona 500.
The Note at ABC News says that Bush will be appearing at the Daytona 500.
Judith Miller will have him driving one of the cars.
Campaign techniques Bush can count on:
Terror alerts!
Ricin in the mailroom!
Bill "objective" O'Reilly
Paula Zahn
Wolf Blowjob
Speaking only at military bases, with nice press coverage, and the press never commenting on "hey, this is always at a military base, what gives?"
Condescending Rice
Rush "F*ck you I beat the rap" Limbaugh
I went to a rally for Dukakis in Chicago in '88 and a couple of friends and I were suddenly told we were security. So we stepped under the rope and turned to face the crowd in our new role as Dukakis Security. No one asked us our names, where we were from, nothing. We were given no instructions of any kind.
A minute later, Dukakis stepped out on stage and out of the crowd ran a dozen pro-lifers toward the stage yelling, "Murderer!" and "Duke of Death!" Needless to say, we were not successful in thwarting their attack.
I knew the Dukakis campaign wasn't quite well oiled enough to make it to the White House. We were on the national news though.
Bush was here in Phoenix last November. I heard grapevine-style that he stopped by a local Tex-Mex joint and mingled with the patrons.
Los Dos Molinos? I love that place.
TBone, trial by fire. Ouch.
If I'm reading correctly, then Seraphiel's 5:25 p.m. post should be removed from this board. (Even tongue-in-cheek, certain things should not be said....)
All I did was quote a favorite excuse of the Republicans.
I don't know which one it was. Los Dos Molinos is WONDERFUL. If he went there... I sure hope they didn't put pictures of him eating there on the wall or otherwise commemorate his visit... cuz if they did I may never go there again.
My tinfoil hat is getting warm...
...I can't help it, though. I feel certain that there are already Republican plans underway to stage violent, disruptive protests at their own convention in NYC (a la Chicago, 196
and blame them on libbruls, turrurists, and what not.
And with only nine or ten weeks between the convention and the election there won't be a whole lot of time to "investigate." Just accuse.
In 1992 the Clinton campaign set up a quick stop at our town that was planned at the last minute. It was very informal. Clinton and company got out of a bus and shook hands with the crowd. I got to shake his hand. Then, with no stage, Clinton gave an impromptu speech. (And he was here, deep in solid Republican country)
Imagine that! Imagine George Bush doing anything like that.
I think Bush will just fly over in Airforce One and drop campaign leaflets to the lil' 'Murcans down here.
i think one of my comments was removed. Geez. Was it really that offensive? I think not.
So would it be unreasonable to think that if Amurica constantly sees its preznit on TV, framed in the shot by a well-cast but phony crowd... and then the election results are overwhelmingly rotten, so they cook 'em ... it will at least look plausible to the public that he won, fair and square?
I'm just sayin'.
The Note at ABC News says that Bush will be appearing at the Daytona 500.
Is the Presidential jumpsuit ready? Will it have all his sponsors' patches on it -- Halliburton, Bechtel, Enron, Exxon, Pfizer, Mr. Salty, Rib-It, etc.?
Hey, maybe this is the key strategy:
Diebold!
" I can't imagine Bush doing anything like that, or doing the meet-n-greet at the local coffee shop. I can't imagine him getting in with the crowds."
Oh, heavens no! Crowds have cooties.
SteveLG - I think they are going to try to keep a lid on things in NYC by constantly invoking the memory of 9/11, as they did when the Davos Summit was staged at the Waldorf Astoria some time after 9/11.
If I'm reading correctly, then Seraphiel's 5:25 p.m. post should be removed from this board. (Even tongue-in-cheek, certain things should not be said....)
All I did was quote a favorite excuse of the Republicans.
I got the joke. But I'm old enough to have seen the real thing a few times...not fun.
woot: don't forget the red-footed and the blue-footed.
This makes me curious. Was the "free speech" zones implemented before The Day that Justifies Everything?
How about I offer to submit to be strip searched, and cavity probed to prove I'm safe and not a threat.
Could I wave an anti-Bush sign then?
Do the news media even bother to go to the "Free Speech" encampments and get some shoots for some "balance" like they did when 80,000 war protestors filling a city square were given the same air play as 39 people on a street corner?
Well, it seems certain that Bush won't be conducting the usual campaigh, which means they're going to have to get as much mileage as possible out of the appearances he does make, lots of news coverage of the one time he's seen somewhere, especially the northern states.
Tena, don't you think he'll be really ridiculed if he avoids debates? The Dem candidate will insist on them and will benefit politically if Bush refuses. Who really believes all these excuses anyway? Bush has cried wolf once too often.
No debate.
No public appearances.
Handpicked regular joes for highly scripted photo-ops.
A fawning press licking the ground he knuckle-walks on.
Qick little, flippant quips to the press.
Lots and lots of appearances with handpicked military personell.
Free-speech zones highly in force.
Bush won't campaign in a city that is majority Dem voters.
Lots of $1000-a-plate fundraisers.
Lots of T.V. ads.
And you'll know when he's in town by the helicopters, large vans and trucks everywhere -- all with the same logos on them from companies you've never heard of, increased police presence, secret service everywhere, roadblocks, and sattelite dishes on the newsvans.
Poppy campaigned pretty much the same way. I remember that because at the time I was living in Michigan, which was a bit of a battleground state. Boy-king is even more paranoid and security-crazed, plus heartily disliked by a large portion of the people. You and I will never see the man in the flesh. It just won't happen. Not that I personally feel a need to.
If there's a debate, Bush will insist on getting the questions in advance, like the Gropenfuhrer did -- and got -- for the one California Recall debate he agreed to.
You and I will never see the man in the flesh.
No, but he's not going to win any votes that way either. He'll have his base. That's it. People want up close and personal. The Dem will be out there, shaking hands and kissing babies.
But the faithful will get the up-close and personal because they'll be chosen to appear at events by the local Repug. organizations when they're asked to provide attendees.
The masses will get the Fox News bukkake and they'll like it well enough.
I don't disagree, but he needs more votes than he got last time.
Moot point. He's gonna lose anyway.
Well, he won't be able to keep the protestors out of New York during the GOPrano convention.
Are there any whiz kids here who are good with PhotoShop? I'd love a picture of Bush wearing one of those Mussolini-style hats, with the caption "Il Douche". Would make a great sign for the NY protestors.
well, I bet the Rethuglican National Convention will be a real bitch.
Everyone write the ACLU's 1-800-# on your arms in indelible ink!!!!!
(and don't forget your swim goggles, a small water bottle, a cloth to cover your nose and mouth....and the men might want to wear crotch protection.
And I am talking to the elderly and union members here, since they often arrive at events like these thinking that they have freedom of speech.
Of course you have freedom of speech....as long as you are not standing on the same street as someone who has said too much....
pie - and if he refuses to debate, whoever is sponsoring the debate should just give the entire time frame over to his opponent for an hour long (or however long) open mike.
pie - I think that Rove has weighed the possible negatives of Bush not debating vs. the possible negatives of Bush debating, and realizes that in the balance it is better for them that Bush not debate. I frankly cannot imagine Bush debating unless the whole thing is scripted. But I have a hard time imagining that the Democratic candidate would agree to such a debate. If he did, he would be a fool. It makes much better club to bang Bush over the head with that he refused to debate. Certainly better than agreeing to a scripted debate, which is an oxymoron anyway.
I can't help but think Rove has something up his sleeve. But hey, maybe he's really sweatin'!
Basically, I think Rove will pick a few key issues, 3 maximum, like gay marriage, war on terra, and some other thing that makes Reps piss all over. He will train Bush on several key phrases to say. And that's all we will hear, over and over. And if the press remains as whore-i-bull as they have been, they will play along with this.
Even so, I think the American people have moved a little beyond these tricks.
Boy-king is even more paranoid and security-crazed . . .
. . . which his handlers have every reason to encourage.
Bush is going to need therapy and/or drugs once he leaves office. Sudden loss of non-stop butt-kissing and people to gussy up reality for him is going to be a terrific shock.
But pie, it's not a moot point. Not to say that I disagree with your assesment that he's got his base and the Dem will be freer to move about and swing some votes his way... I was just putting out what I predict for the Personal Responsibility Tour '04 Bush campaign...
But it's not a moot point because he does have all that media in his pocket. Way, way moreso than he did in 2000. Those crackwhores aren't going to give up the pipe without a nasty, dirty streetfight.
And if the press remains as whore-i-bull as they have been, they will play along with this.
Maybe not. He's been jerking them around for the last 37 months. It's payback time.
JimK posted a link to a pic of Russert interviewing Bush on another thread. Of couse they're trying to portray Bush as being very presidential:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/
news...ivddhu3a_photo0
Under the DEMS we are a democracy,under the GOP we are not.
Very sad, and very simple.
Kerry should declare at every rally that the whole country is a "free speech zone," no matter how much Bush and Ashcroft disagree. Further, Kerry should characterize Bush's extreme aversion to the public for what it is: cowardice.
MoniCa, I wasn't aiming that at you. I just believe that it doesn't matter what he does, because his record speaks for him now. And it's broken.
I also agree with Molly that the love affair with the press is not what it once was.
Right, Kerry can press all these issues, about free speech zones and such. There's a gazillion stupid things that just need to be hounded on, over and over.
NTodd and renato: It wasn't Los Dos Molinos in the story I heard. Bush supposedly visited some hole-in-the-wall place in north Phoenix. I can't remember the name, but apparently it's a favorite of visiting celebrities who are in a mood to slum.
But I agree that Los Dos is awesome.
I'm guessing the flight suit footage may be used in Dem spots, and won't be touched by the GOP.
Bush will "campaign" by "being presidential". He'll schedule a lot of official appearances (with Potemkin audiences), where he'll give "policy" speeches that are really campaign speeches. He'll get more news coverage for this, because he's the preznit, than the Democrat candidate will get for any campaign event; everybody will hear all about it, not just his campaign supporters; and the taxpayers will have to pay for the trip instead of his campaign.
Good themes for using the flight suit footage:
Bush out of touch with reality.
Bush misleading the Americans about Iraq.
Bush's AWOL past, and hyocritical present.
Bush plays dress-up while real soldiers die.
More music to our ears, from Salon:
Kerry says he won't make Dukakis' mistake
- - - - - - - - - - - -
By RON FOURNIER
Feb. 7, 2004 | NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) -- As Democrats in two states went to the polls, front-runner John Kerry vowed Saturday to aggressively counter Republican critics, drawing a stark contrast between his party and the GOP. "They're extreme. We're mainstream, and we're going to stand up and fight back," he said.
The Massachusetts senator, under fire from White House allies, sought to assure Democrats that he won't repeat mistakes of 1988 Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis, who responded cautiously to George H.W. Bush's assertions that he was a Massachusetts liberal.
"This week, George Bush and the Republican smear machine have trotted out the same old tired lines of attack that they've used before to divide this nation and to evade the real issues before us. Well, I have news for George Bush, Karl Rove, Ed Gillespie and the rest of their gang: I have fought for my country my whole life. I'm not going to back down now," Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran, said in remarks prepared for delivery Saturday night to Virginia Democrats in Richmond
A clip of the Russert interview was just on the NBC national news. preznit wasn't doing real well. At least in the clip. Russert asked him whether 500 dead and thousands wounded (might even have said disabled) was worth removing Saddam when he didn't have WMD. Bush seemed to recall a funny English movie he once saw, beginning weakly "Every life is precious..." and proceeded to not answer the question, dissolving instead into the administration’s favorite game of seeing who can put "terrorists" and "Saddam" together in as many sentences as possible.
.
...I can't help it, though. I feel certain that there are already Republican plans underway to stage violent, disruptive protests at their own convention in NYC (a la Chicago, 196and blame them on libbruls, turrurists, and what not.
Would a city wide strike be too much to ask for? Let's see the Goopers do a convention without trash pick up, maids, cooks, cab drivers, etc.
Not campaigning? Must mean there won't be any more elections.
And how's the Advanced Troll Blocker working? Why mercy me, I do believe it's working fine; how pleasingly pleasent Eschaton is once more. Ahhhh... I love the smell of Troll Away in the Morning! It smells like... victory.
People, people, hand-shaking and baby kissing are soooo last millenium. Just wait until Osama is "captured," Kerry is Clelanded, and the election is Diebolded.
is it SOP for them to tape an interview a day ahead of time? i really don't know. when will a transcript become available?
Well, Kerry's people already said as much, so it's a pure delight to hear Kerry himself say it. I didn't think he was just going to lie down and let the Rove machine have its way with him. Plus, I think Kerry really is beginning to see the WH in his future, and he wants it.
Bush will campaign from behind the whitewashed stonewall he and his bunch have erected around this presidency. And I hope that the Democratic nominee never lets the people forget that Bush doesn't believe in getting anywhere close to real Americans.
I've been wondering whether a terrorist attack in the next 9 months will help or hurt Bush.
On the one hand, a plot of Bush's popularity shows substantial boosts after 9/11 and the Iraq invasion, and steady erosion after. So, if you're Rove and your primary job in life is to keep Bush in office, do you ignore this or try to work it into the campaign strategy?
On the other hand, it takes a massive amount of arrogance to think you can control events that might be uncontrollable. But of course this could be the most arrogant adminstration in recent US history.
In addition, the administration has not shown a reluctance to act in the face of uncertain outcomes when they think they can control public perceptions...I would place invading Iraq in this category, clearly.
If Bush's re-election becomes more uncertain by summer I have a genuine fear that Rove will chose to solve this by coming up with the Mother of All October Surprises.
I just saw the same clip with Russert. If Bush is this incoherent in the debates,he's in for a rough year.
Did you also see Rummy freaking out in Europe? Why does this man still have a job?
queen crab - is it reallly that bad? We have things looking good for us, and I don't see that Bush can Clelan Kerry - Kerry has a much larger organization around him. Plus, once the Bush people have done something like what they did to Clelan, it is harder for them to pull it off again because everyone is watching more closely. Same with the diebold shit. Don't you think that we, along with a bunch of other people, would fight back hard if any the election rigging shit came up again? We aren't unprepared this time - there is no way the Democrats will lie down and let it all roll over them.
I disagree. We'll see Chimpy often enough in coffee shops and such. However, it'll all be staged with hand picked people. You have to be naive to think it'll be otherwise or that it won't happen.
Personally, Jennifer, I prefer a large picture of a pretzel for my protest sign...
The last presidential debate is scheduled to be in Tempe, AZ at the Gammage Auditorium on the campus of ASU. Anyone who is familiar with the area knows that Apache Blvd curves past the auditorium and joins up with Mill Ave. I would imagine there are several thousand people living within a one mile radius of there. (I'm 3 miles away.) There are dozens of single-family residences on the west side of Mill Ave (and going further west to the railroad tracks which are around 1000 feet from the auditorium), within a couple hundred yards of the front side of Gammage. (I am drearily familiar with the area; I drove this way to work for two years, ending only last November.)
I still can't believe they're going to bring the debate here. I have to wonder if it's a setup...something happens and the debate has to be cancelled because the area can't be secured without disrupting the lives of thousands. Or worse. As it is, I'd see it as my civic duty to go out there with a sign denouncing the unelected fraud. And I know the area; I won't be staying in a free speech zone!
You don't need to get in with the crowds any more.
You only need two things:
(1) Media whores that parrot Administration press releases and lies.
and, as a backup
(2) Rigged Diebold vote-counting software, Republican thugs who can shut down vote-counts, Antonin Scalia, etc.
In the old days, you could throw a tomato at Dear Leader - or boo him. Not anymore.
I've been wondering whether a terrorist attack in the next 9 months will help or hurt Bush.
Vesicle Trafficker, I've worried about this a lot, and have been a big believer in the need for the Dems to innoculate themselves from this by making Bush's incompetence in defending the country an issue.
While I haven't heard much along these lines yet from the Dems (some, though, especially from Clark), it's clear that the atmosphere has changed. At this point, I think it's quite likely that another terror strike will be read by the public as still more evidence that Bush does not have the chops to be president. So right now I feel somewhat safer, because the changed atmosphere lowers the motivation for either domestic or foreign terrorists to do anything before the election.
Of course, the terrorists aren't necessarily planning things to coincide with our elections, in any case. So who knows...
Rummy's "We have shown the world what happens to nations with WMD" + Iraq's not having WMD = "We have shown the world what can happen to any nation at any time."
This is what the world sees. This is why other nations are so unhappy.
I wish someone in the media would just ask the question, "Doesn't the fact that we invaded an unarmed country make countries who don't proliferate WMD think that we're a bunch of liars, and that they may as well proliferate WMDs anyway?"
Did anybody else see Noam's prediction on c-span? - Osama will be caught (may already be caught) and will be "presented" to the world about 2 month before the election. Now this seems a little Orwellian to me, but he has been correct about everything so far.
Did anybody else see Noam's prediction on c-span? - Osama will be caught (may already be caught) and will be "presented" to the world about 2 month before the election... he has been correct about everything so far.
Did he predict the capture of Saddam? Why two months?
The thing you're forgetting is that you don't need to campaign if you're just going to steal the election.
spocko: Do the news media even bother to go to the "Free Speech" encampments and get some shoots for some "balance" like they did when 80,000 war protestors filling a city square were given the same air play as 39 people on a street corner?
They would... if the protestors gathered on the doorstep of the media rather than at the event. That's my plan for Nashville, anyway. Call all of the stations 30 mins. before the crowds arrive, to let them know which station gets to play "1st Amendment" duty, so that one (the competition, if not the targeted station) will cover it.
.
Bush Outreach '04
Dog Drops, T-Ball, and Public Executions.
The impact of any terrorist attack will depend on how bad it is. If it's truly hideous, ie, "Al-Queda gets their filthy mitts on a nuke" hideous, then there won't be an election in 2004. If it's "just" a building blown up or another plane crashed, it's impossible to say which way the population will swing; running back to Bush for protection, or casting him out for failing to protect...
Also, someone suggested smuggling an anti-Bush sign into an event inside your shirt. I would say that suddenly whipping something out from inside your shirt while in the presence of Secret Service agents is a Very Bad Idea. Make your sign, cover it with an easily-removed pro-Bush message, and then rip the latter off once you are in position. This also avoids the potential problem of being patted down on your way in.
The biggest October Surprise of all might be Bush coming up with Osama like a rabbit out of a hat and the American public roaring back, "You had him all the time, motherfucker!"
Most people are naturally reluctant to admit that they are led by a liar and a whore, but an incident like that might be just enough to push them over the edge.
If it's truly hideous, ie, "Al-Queda gets their filthy mitts on a nuke" hideous, then there won't be an election in 2004.
Is there even a procedure for cancelling a presidential election in US law? After all, one was held in 1864.
Excerpt from MTP just played on Hardball.
One highly biased anti-Bush Democrats opinion: Bush F#cking S#cked. He did not look confident. He was wavering. He was stuttering. He was blabbering.
I loved the MSNBC reporter's review of the Bush interview: RELAXED and COMFORTABLE
and COMFORTABLE
and RELAXED... (as Bill Hicks said: go back to sleep, America)
well, maybe he and that fluffer Russert had a nice cig together after. Looks like the earlier Atrios prediction was right.
I expect a Bush "Rose Garden Strategy" if the polls will let him get away with it. As far as getting into situations in which we can disrupt his scripted press conferences, well, at least two of us can date the twins.
Beth brings up something I've thought of more than once: the Theodore Roosevelt vice-presidency.
Teddy was forced into the vice-presidency, but willingly. The New York GOP machine and boss, Charles Platt, were hacked at his progressive governorship, and were withdrawing their support. Roosevelt was popular, nationally, and an energetic campaigner. After the election, Teddy considered going back to law school, and sort of fished around for about his post-term future. He worked only a week or so as veep--the inauguration was in mid-March, and the Senate adjourned in early April. On 7 September, Leon Czolgosz screwed up the GOP plan by, in 1901 lingo, "popping a cap into McKinley's ass" at the Exposition in Buffalo. It's occurred to me several times that the Rove plan to return us to the McKinley Era has fixed this oversight.
OT, but could someone please explain "Potemkin audiences?" I don't get the reference. Thanks.
"Potemkin villages" full of happy, prosperous peasants were reputedly constructed by minister Potemkin to comfort a Czar on his tours of Russia. It's a reference to a pleasant stage-set.
There's been talk about a 'spring offensive' in Afghanistan or northern Pakistan to capture bin Laden. There's probably a deal with Musharraf to allow large numbers of troops into Pakistan and get serious (after almost three years) about capturing bin Laden.
Note the US response to Pakistan's weak handling of the matter of spreading nuclear weapons technology to Iran and North Korea: "That's good enough for us. No problem there." There's a fix in.
I don't know about the 'already caught' thing (though some Repubs have certanly been talking as if he has been), but bin Laden could certainly turn up captured between now and the election. What's worse is al Qaeda would likely respond with a major action preferably against an American target. If this plays out within a month or two of the election, we're sunk. Americans care very deeply about jobs, medicare, the economy, etc, etc, but I'm afraid that the desire for vengence will trump them all. The one thing we can rely on Bush for is to 'strike back' (i.e. engage in more military adventurism), and I'm afraid that in the aftermath of a fresh attack, that's what the people will vote for.
Others here have suggested that more attacks would actually hurt Bush. In general I agree. But the capture of bin Ladin -- proving Bush to be the Great White Terrorist Hunter -- followed by dire warnings and then a major hit could be a deadly combination for us all.
OT: Looks like the good professor over at Instapundit, who doesn't put faith in anonymous peeps unless they have a proven track record of excellence is now linking to an anti-Kerry story with the same, anonymous, Snopes-debunked "Do you know who I am" thread.
won't campaigning mess with his xbox schedule? he tried playing risk but couldn't find three other people who had the time.
J.T.
well, Dumbya has actually been to a couple of coffee-shops already. That was a poor choice of words-of course the wahhabi al-Bushi would prefer a closed off pre-vetted coffe shop (where no one is named Muhammad) to some truly public venue.
Just read a couple of articles @ Yahoo regarding the bush strategy (such as it is) . . . among other things he's going to speak to all the "mischaracterizations" about his policies, ha!!! The interview with Russert is apparently the start of his "campaign" to set us all straight. I guess he would know about mischaracterization better then anyone.
MAYbe down in cowboy cunt'ry, where those good ole boys'll give him a rip roarin Texas howdy.
Dont mess with Texas, unless you want stupid disease.
The GOP plan is based on fear. If Americans are confident, Bush is toast.
Draw your own conclusions.
Dean passed Edwards in MI. With 519 of 590 precincts reporting, Kerry has 50%, Dean, 17.4%, and Edwards,13.7%.
Remember this past November Shrub visited his only buddy Tony over in England. I thought that Shrub visited at a Local Pub while over there. If my memory serves me correctly, it was an extremely controlled environment.
I know things are not exactly the same in this country, but I would still imagine that if the Prince Bubble Boy were to spontaneously venture outside into real world Americana for more than 5 minutes, he might just catch a glimpse of just how many people despise him. I can't imagine Rove taking such a risk or allowing that to happen and anything resembling that scenario would be extremely well staged and choreographed. However, when you have 200 million dollars in your campaign chest,guess you can afford to put on such a production.
Last thought, do you think the c-span camera guys will ever follow him around on his Personal Responsibility Campaign tour?
Another terrorist attack (short of a nuke, which I agree might bring martial law) won't necessarily work in Bush's favor. 9/11 caught America (most of it) flatfooted, horrified and so on. But now we're supposedly on the alert, prepared, Patriot-acted and Homeland Securitied. Another major attack could very easily be portrayed as a measure of Bush's incompetence.
"There's a war on terror, but Bush hasn't been fighting it."
You can quote chapter and verse on the things the Bushies haven't done to safeguard the US.
And there's General Clark's delightful quote: "I'm not attacking him because he's attacking terrorists, I'm attacking him because he's NOT attacking terrorists."
And the ricin thing hasn't made a twitch in the Bush Bounce-o-meter, has it?
*slightly* OT, but check out this:
http://tinyurl.com/2ztx3
...aside from the apparent chaos and disorganization, note that nearly every single commentor mentions overwhelming attendance... this is good, very good. We just have to keep it up for a few more months....
Bush seemed to recall a funny English movie he once saw, beginning weakly "Every life is precious..."
Could he have been thinking of Monty Python?
Every Sperm Is Sacred
(lyrics by Michael Palin and Terry Jones)
There are Jews in the world, there are Buddists,
There are Hindus and Mormons and then
There are those that follow Mohammad, but
I've never been one of them.
I'm a Roman Catholic,
And have been since before I was born,
And the one thing they say about Catholics is
They'll take you as soon as you're warm.
You don't have to be a six footer,
You don't have to have a great brain,
You don't have to have any clothes on,
You're a Catholic the moment Dad came, because
Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.
Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.
Let the heathen spill theirs,
On the dusty ground,
God shall make them pay for
Each sperm that can't be found.
Every sperm is wanted,
Every sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed,
In your neighborhood.
Hindu, Taoist, Morman,
Spill theirs just anywhere,
But God loves those who treat their
Semen with more care.
Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.
Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed,
In your neighborhood.
Every sperm is useful,
Every sperm is fine,
God needs everybody's,
Mine, and mine, and mine.
Let the pagans spill theirs,
O'er mountain, hill and plain.
God shall strike them down for
Each sperm that's spilt in vain.
Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed,
In your neighborhood.
Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.
"24 December 1994: Algerian terrorists hijacked an Air France airliner and threatened to fly it into the Eiffel Tower. The terrorists were killed when French commandos stormed the plane."
As the 9-11 commission continues, let's remember, okay?
-Off-topic, but an touching example of political loyalty:
New York Times on the Web
February 8, 2004
Major Union Plans to Pull Its Support for Dean
By JODI WILGOREN
URLINGTON, Vt., Feb. 7 — The largest of three international unions that had endorsed Howard Dean's bid for the Democratic presidential nomination plans to yank its support, union officials and the Dean campaign said Saturday.
Gerald W. McEntee, the president of the union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, spent an hour meeting over lunch here Saturday with Dr. Dean and his new campaign chief, Roy Neel, but came away unsatisfied with their last-gasp strategy to win Wisconsin's Feb. 17 primary.
Aides to Dr. Dean, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that at the meeting Mr. McEntee expressed concern about Dr. Dean's viability and the prospect that continuing his campaign could weaken the ultimate Democratic nominee.
Later Saturday afternoon, one AFSCME official said, "We're stopping our activities in Wisconsin and we're shifting our focus to the general election."
Mr. Neel said that Dr. Dean's other two major labor supporters, the Service Employees International Union and the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, pledged to remain with the campaign at least through Wisconsin.
It looks like Bush was backlit during the Russert interview. They're still working the halo effect.
OT. Mre rotten tricks:
Britain helped America to conduct a secret and potentially illegal spying operation at the United Nations in the run-up to the Iraq war, The Observer can reveal.
The operation, which targeted at least one permanent member of the UN Security Council, was almost certainly in breach of the Vienna conventions on diplomatic relations, which strictly outlaw espionage at the UN missions in New York.
There's a famous poem about JFK that's written in the shape of a set of crosshair sights.
Here's the end of the article:
At the time, The Observer was told by Foreign Office officials of serious doubts that the war was legal.
When the GCHQ revelations were first published in The Observer last March, the Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith, had still not publicly announced his final advice to Downing Street.
At the time, it was expected that he would agree with most experts in international law that intervention would be unlawful without a second resolution.
The legality of the war was a highly sensitive issue for senior military officers on the eve of war, who were wary of being accused of war crimes in the aftermath of the conflict.
The former assistant chief of defence staff Sir Timothy Garden said that the legal basis of the war is all the more important now that Britain has signed up to the International Criminal Court.
'We did it on the best advice that was available in a democratic country. But following an order is not an excuse in the end.'
Thanks to all those who responded to my question upblog regarding whether a terrorist attack would help or hurt Bush's re-election chances.
The consensus seems to be that only a major (i.e., nuclear) act will ensure Bush's hold on power, because he could enact martial law then and postpone the elections perhaps.
This of course would need to be timed perfectly (say within 2 or so weeks before the election) to work, probably.
But the assumption that needs to be swallowed is that Bush et al. can plan that far in advance. Let's face it, these people are not playing chess, they're playing poker.
This does not leave me feeling more comfortable about whether they will really consider such an option or not.
Yes, I can do those things you don't think I can do. Yes, maybe I won't do them well, but half of America finds that endearing, so it doesn't really matter.
Misunderestimate and lose.
Less than half, georgie.
Less than half.
Empirical study of the evidence will show that more Americans died from terrorism under George Bush's "watch" (those shrubs in Crawford really needed trimming that August) than under all Presidents before him combined. Why anyone can argue they are safer under such a miserable failure who went aWol is beyond me. A second attack wouldn't be galvanizing for Bush's support but would be par for the course.
Here's how Bush campaigns: the next stop is Meet the Press tomorrow. You can't buy exposure like that; sometimes you don't even have to.
Saturday evening and I'm already hearing on NPR some of what came up in the taping earlier today. Damn that liberal media!
OFP;
That would be an interesting statistic, if it turns out to be true. Do you have a reference for this?
I don't know why anyone would be surprised about Bush playing dress-up as a pilot. I mean, he dresses up and pretends to be President most other days.
Out here, I have only ever heard the words "constitutional rights","equal rights"and "freedom of speech" spoken with contempt. Americand are convinced these are bad things, which harm them, and they will be glad to see them go. They don't want a president, they want a king, and the more bush acts imperial the more they love 'em. I think it's all over. Name me one country that has ever gone back along the path we have taken, back to freedom and democracy. It doesn't happen that way. Please name one country. And if there are major disruptions of civil order or the economy, they think it's the rapture coming. It's over.
Well, giving your question some serious thought, I would predict the following;
1. Advertisements featuring Iraqis who had family members who were victims of Saddams regime telling horror stories and thanking Bush for saving them.
2. Pictures of Afghani women throwing off their burkhas
3. Future astronauts enthusing over a chance to be the next man on the moon.
4. And lets not forget that 200+ million warchest...they are content to stay on the defensive for now but Rove WILL go on the attack and in a big way.
I just saw the clip of tomorrow's MTP interview. Dubyah kept glancing to his left as he talked. I recall hearing that one of the "tells" of a person being untruthful (or evasive) is the eyes constantly shifting to the left. Anyone have any further input as to the validity of that behavior?
Mooser,
If we get a cell together at Gitmo, we'll just redecorate and make it FABULOUS!
I just saw the clip of tomorrow's MTP interview. Dubyah kept glancing to his left as he talked. I recall hearing that one of the "tells" of a person being untruthful (or evasive) is the eyes constantly shifting to the left. Anyone have any further input as to the validity of that behavior?
We don't need behavioral science to tell us that Georgie is lying.
We have facts and history to prove it conclusively.
they better hand pick everybody in th cheerin crowd or george will be callin for his mommy.
Name me one country that has ever gone back along the path we have taken, back to freedom and democracy. It doesn't happen that way. Please name one country.
Portugal. Back in the 1970s, Mooser, Portugal overthrew a dictatorship that had ruled it during most of the 20th century, flirted briefly with a troika that included the local Communist Party, then ended up with a full-fledged parliamentary democracy. Spain is a kind of special case in that it retained its fascist dictator until he finally died; it's a parliamentary democracy today with a constitutional monarchy mostly because Franco croaked. You don't get full credit for that.
And we could note that that Russia also moved from dictatorship to democracy (although it does appear to be pining after totalitarianism these days). I leave the fates of the former Soviet bloc states as an exercise for the reader.
Did he say "uhhhh" a lot?
Attila, have you seen photos from Kabul recently? Just about all of the women you see are still in burkhas.
Sam, do you think those women will be the ones who end up in the commercials?
d,
behaviorists say that people look to the left when they're lying as a function of accessing the "left brain," the locus of creativity and imagination, i.e. fabricated stories.
the media lemmings will follow *any* story off a cliff, and it's been clear for a long, long time that we have to press this point that W. IS AFRAID OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. we have to say it over and over again--mainly because it's true, but also because eventually either w. will have to counter it by stepping out in public or suffer the consequences of continued suspicious isolation. he can't remain isolated in the face of accusation, and if he steps out, he has to suffer the consequence of messy ol' democracy.
This is increasiungly a Philip K. Dick world. Ever read "FAITH OF OUR FATHERS"? There is no Bush, only a simulacron. They don't need him anymore. Just the packaging.
You will see the Chimperor wading through throngs of adoring masses. It will be CGI but you don't need very many pixels for television...
How come Saddam was able to walk around in public (as the war went on) and yet - I agree with Atrios - the image of Bush amongst regular people seems entirely foreign and laughable?
We don't need behavioral science to tell us that Georgie is lying.
You're right, we can just check if his lips are moving.
I'm like most people here: A bit flummoxed at Bush's inability to consort with we, the unwashed masses (although I bathed recently, thank you).
I saw Clinton on his last night of campaigning in 1992, at the airport in McAllen, TX. He spoke a brief speech, then did what all great politicians do: He got out there and pressed the flesh. I have never seen someone so enthralled with the pol routine. He shook my hand and spoke to me. It was just a "Hi, thanks for coming," but I've never forgotten it. You could feel it in the air that night: We were meeting the next President. You cannot BUY that kind of moment. You cannot force it. You cannot script it. This is what Rove and the GOPFascists will never, ever understand.
The American people are used to access to their Presidential contenders. Rove has no choice about keeping Bush away from Real Americans. We know this. But our nominee, whoever he is, MUST get out there with the people while hammering Bush for being afraid of facing Real America (along with WHY), and never, ever let up. Pols mixing it up with the voters runs deep in the core of the American psyche. We cannot underestimate it. Or misunderestimate, as Captain Bunnypants would have it.
I doubt that Bush will do any real pressing of the flesh, but we know that he will run a National Security campaign.
How, then, does he explain that in favor of attacking a country with no WMD and no real means of producing them, he turned a blind eye to the very dangerous nuclear proliferation by Pakistan? Why did he turn a blind eye to the funding of this effort by Saudi Arabia?
Kerry has got to outflank him on the conservative side of defense-Bush farted around with a non-threat while choosing to overlook a very real, grave and gathering threat.
This was posted above:
There's been talk about a 'spring offensive' in Afghanistan or northern Pakistan to capture bin Laden. There's probably a deal with Musharraf to allow large numbers of troops into Pakistan and get serious (after almost three years) about capturing bin Laden.
Note the US response to Pakistan's weak handling of the matter of spreading nuclear weapons technology to Iran and North Korea: "That's good enough for us. No problem there." There's a fix in.
Magnum | Email | Homepage | 02.07.04 - 8:05 pm | #
This is a very likely, nay probable, scenario. Forget what the hell other countries may think of you, what kind of president pardons a member of his government (and so quickly) for turning over some of the most sensitive Top Secret information a government can possess to other nations? Couple the preposterousness of this with the American reaction of shrugged shoulders, and you certainly have what appears to be a very amateurish attempt to make a "secret" deal.
It also should reveal to the average short-attention-spanned American the real dangers of this administration putting politics above national security.
We were stung by a yellow-jacket in 2001, and the Bush handlers' first reaction was to poke a stick into the nest and stir it around a bit. To claim some sort of victory by finding and killing the original wasp that dared to sting us is a bit Pyrrhic, don't you think?
I saw Clinton on his last night of campaigning in 1992, at the airport in McAllen, TX. He spoke a brief speech, then did what all great politicians do: He got out there and pressed the flesh. I have never seen someone so enthralled with the pol routine. He shook my hand and spoke to me. It was just a "Hi, thanks for coming," but I've never forgotten it. You could feel it in the air that night: We were meeting the next President. You cannot BUY that kind of moment. You cannot force it. You cannot script it. This is what Rove and the GOPFascists will never, ever understand.
I think this is a very important point in this discussion: Bush doesn't seem like he's comfortable with being the President or being a politician. Whatever their faults, you could tell that Clinton and Reagan loved what they were doing and sincerely believed that they were doing the best for America. With the two Bushes you get this feeling that they feel that they're entitled to be President because of who they are, not because they genuinely have any vision of how to lead the country. So, they don't like dealing with all the little people, because, frankly, they're not important. The only thing they're good for is voting us into office. I think you'll see a few attempts at having Dubya mingle with voters, but he'll view it the same way a little kid views eating vegetables.
When Bush comes to my town, it costs a thousand bucks a head to hear him eep for twenty minutes. The skies are filled with bristling black helicopters and all traffic is stopped for many blocks. Recently they walled off the "free speech" zone by shutting down public transportation and using the buses as barricades. What freakin' country is this?
There's probably a deal with Musharraf to allow large numbers of troops into Pakistan and get serious (after almost three years) about capturing bin Laden.
I doubt it. Letting in large amounts of US troops would be a wildly unpopular move among Pakistanis. Musharraf is currently walking a very narrow tightrope.
You will see the Chimperor wading through throngs of adoring masses. It will be CGI but you don't need very many pixels for television...
Yeah, I can see it now: Tens of thousands of orcs screaming "Bush! Bush!"
Re getting past Secret Service, from upthread, and to protest closer to Bush and not in a 'fucking speech zone' --
Bring seven friends. Each carries a sign, where one side has one of four letters (B U S H, two of each) and the other side is blank. Stand in a line - B U S H B U S H. Then when the cameras get close, four of you turn your signs around and a couple of you swap positions, and you get
B U _ _ S H _ _
Maybe too clever, but I guarantee the picture will show up on the Internet.
I remember shaking hands with VP Dan Quayle when he came to our town at the end of the '92 run.
He spoke on the street, then shook hands with people. He seemed to be a nice, open guy.
Of course I screamed my lungs out at him during the speech. But they let me shake his hand anyway.
And of course, they might not have worried too much about his safty.
In reply to spocko (02.07.04 - 6:11 pm), who asked, "Was the "free speech" zones implemented before The Day that Justifies Everything?"
That's a big YES. Bush has been sheltered from dissent by "First Amendment Zones" since his Unauguration. I know, because I was at several protests, including that one, in 2001.
Lefty, we can start with the orange jumpsuits and coordinate from there.
Thanks, Tony B for attempting to answer my plea.
As far as Bush pressing the flesh, wouldn't that devalue the large contributions people are so proud to make for access to the Pres?
Americans want a King, not a President. And when people see how dumb he is they admire it! he's a regular guy. I don't hold out much hope, Portugal not withstanding.
I went to a big time Clinton rally once and all the protesters like myself were kept by police 3 or 4 blocks from the main platform. The main platform was surrounded by rabid Clinton supporters and local political hangers-on. We got there plenty early enough to get up front but when they saw our signs we had to move to the back of the bus so to speak well out of their eyesight. The Clintons couldn't see us but I am sure they heard us. The assholes. All politicans get their people up front so do not try to bull shit anyone about how wonderful the Clintons were. They were always separating the faithful fools from the intelligent unbelievers unless it was back in the 70s when they were cruising around the back roads of Arkansas trying to figure out the next lie they could tell the people in order to get elected.
Senator John Kerry: want to know all about Senator John F---ing Kerry? Go here . This site is very busy so you might have to try multiple times. Be sure to read about his service in Vietnam. The description of it here is a little different than what I have read elsewhere. May or may not be true.
Look at his privileged background. If he brazenly claims that service in the military during battle is a prerequisite for leading our fight against (his surrender to) terrorism then his background as a member of Boston very very very very very rich elite certainly must qualify him as being a representative of the little guy as he claims to be. It seems like the last president's total lack of military experience wasn't much of a prerequisite in 1992 and 1996 but now it is. At least Clinton was dirt poor at one time, Kerry never was.
Rove has all this information that is on this website (and probably more) and 200 million dollars.
If one picture of Senator Kerry with the traitor Hanoi Jane Fonda shows up he is toast with the American public. Carrying around North Vietnamese flags and throwing metals around was bad enough. Of course that picture with Hanoi Jane will make him a huge hero in these parts.
faithful fools from the intelligent unbelievers
Ooh, better be careful there or Ed Gillespie might accuse you of "political hate speech."
our fight against (his surrender to) terrorism
Surrender to terrorism? WTF?
If one picture of Senator Kerry with the traitor Hanoi Jane Fonda
Oh, when did Jane Fonda do something as damaging and treasonous as outing a covert CIA operative?
Last I heard, never. But somebody in Georgie's White House did, and he doesn't want us to find out who.
Some of the Bush warchest is being spent now wahoos ( to call them trolls, I think, besmirches honorable beasties) like M'sieur Slater are on patrol or maybe the internet smell of someone saying nice things about Big Bill set him off.
In 196, I was volunteering for Michael Coles for Congres against Newt, and Clinton came to town. I got a VIP ticket free with no security check, and the extent of the security that I saw was two guys standing at the gate with disaffected looks on their faces (better phrasing: "the only security I RECOGNIZED"). I had more of a hassle protesting Ashcroft's visit to Univ. of Florida than I did getting to see Clinton.
Bush can't do it... He is such a big liar, he cant do a public appearance thats not heavily controlled and he cant do a press appearance thats not somehow tilted. Im convinced that Tim Russert was offered the Bush interview on the condition that he do no tough follow up questions. Then he got Condoleeza's interview- same situation.
the only way bush is going to do a debate is with some messed up condition that allows him to spew his soundbytes without ever being called on what a load of B.S. it is.
George W. Bush, the incumbent President of the United States and winner of the 2004 Presidential Election. See George W. Bush for a detailed biography and information about his current presidency, and George W. Bush presidential campaign, 2000 for a description of his first presidential campaign. See United States presidential election, 2004 for general information on the 2004 election.George W. Bush's opponent was U.S. Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), whose primary campaign was successful in securing the majority of Democratic delegate votes. For his presidential campaign, see John Kerry presidential campaign, 2004.George W. Bush's chief political strategist was Karl Rove, who had the title Senior Advisor to the President. He was later joined in August 2004 by Karen Hughes, a former Bush advisor who returned after some time away. His campaign manager was Ken Mehlman.
--------------------------------------------------
-
Shanon
iowa drug rehab
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
